• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Doral Moore

RJKarl said:
Bird, data without context is useless. I'm not saying Danny has done a good job, but the situation he was handed was so bad that it was inevitably going to take time to fix with Bruce Pearl-like cheating. We had less talent than at any time in the past 45+ years I've been watching Wake bball. What made matters worse was that we close to being filled up with scholarships. Regardless of what we wished to happen, realistically we were going to suck for those first two years. That's the just the way it was.

We grossly overachieved in Year 3 and underachieved in Year 4. In Year 3, not a single expert or ACC coach gave Wake a shot at the post season, much less making the NCAAT.

Many on this board think that defense can be taught and invoked regardless of who is on your roster. This is simply not true. It becomes more pronounced when you have multiple holes.

We don't what Danny's ceiling is yet. Having talent will give us a lot of answers.
Click to expand...

You are still drawing different conclusions based on the same available data, just emphasizing different bits of information. Two other ACC programs (VT and BC) and maybe a third (UVA) have dug out from similar talent holes in shorter time than we have over the last 8 years. Context is definitely a must, but there are multiple scales at which one could consider the context. I don't think your suggestion that Manning deserves another year is unreasonable, I just happen to disagree with it. Likewise my disagreement isn't derived in hate, it is derived from a different contextualization of the available data.
 
RJKarl said:
Bird, data without context is useless. I'm not saying Danny has done a good job, but the situation he was handed was so bad that it was inevitably going to take time to fix with Bruce Pearl-like cheating. We had less talent than at any time in the past 45+ years I've been watching Wake bball. What made matters worse was that we close to being filled up with scholarships. Regardless of what we wished to happen, realistically we were going to suck for those first two years. That's the just the way it was.

We grossly overachieved in Year 3 and underachieved in Year 4. In Year 3, not a single expert or ACC coach gave Wake a shot at the post season, much less making the NCAAT.

Many on this board think that defense can be taught and invoked regardless of who is on your roster. This is simply not true. It becomes more pronounced when you have multiple holes.

We don't what Danny's ceiling is yet. Having talent will give us a lot of answers.
Click to expand...

Good post. Honestly, I forgot that we did overachieve in Year 3.

That said, having gone to Wake in the late 80s, after Sam Ivy left, we were historically talent-free. There is no comparison to the last few Bob Staak years. Ralph Kitley was our starting 5. Cal Boyd was our starting point guard. There was nobody on the roster even sniffing professional hoops, if memory serves. We played a med student 25-30 minutes a game. A med student. Some guy who didn't even play his undergraduate years.

This is what makes last year so frustrating. We had NBA talent and still sucked. We often just sucked in the last 4 minutes of games. It is really really worrying. You have to almost hope that Crawford is Cody Miller McIntyre like in the final 4 minutes to support our historically bad finishes last year and not worry about Coach Manning as a game manager and even as a leader. to add the cherry on top, we were a great FT% team, so we weren't losing games on the FT line. We were losing them by having no offense and players freaking out and going it alone and taking awful shots.
 
Why is it so hard to find out if a 7-1 280 lb man is somewhere on a small college campus?
 
birdman said:
You are still drawing different conclusions based on the same available data, just emphasizing different bits of information. Two other ACC programs (VT and BC) and maybe a third (UVA) have dug out from similar talent holes in shorter time than we have over the last 8 years. Context is definitely a must, but there are multiple scales at which one could consider the context. I don't think your suggestion that Manning deserves another year is unreasonable, I just happen to disagree with it. Likewise my disagreement isn't derived in hate, it is derived from a different contextualization of the available data.
Click to expand...

UVA didn't dig out of a hole. Let's see if BC maintains their growth, Danny's third year was better than BC's year was this year. VT had some players sitting out.
 
RJKarl said:
UVA didn't dig out of a hole. Let's see if BC maintains their growth, Danny's third year was better than BC's year was this year. VT had some players sitting out.
Click to expand...

If not a hole, what do you call the period from 2008-2011 for UVA? What if BC doesn't maintain their growth? Should they stick with the coach because he had 1 out 4 descent seasons? I don't understand your VT comment.

Regardless, my point still stands that you are just picking and emphasizing different bits of information than I and therefore drawing different conclusions. Not because you hate or are an idiot, but because you have a different perspective that I do.
 
Last edited:
birdman said:
If not a hole, what do you call the period from 2008-2011 for UVA? What if BC doesn't maintain their growth? Should they stick with the coach because he had 1 out 4 descent seasons? I don't understand your VT comment.

Regardless, my point still stands that you are just picking and emphasizing different bits of information than I and therefore drawing different conclusions. Not because you hate or are an idiot, but because you have a different perspective that I do.
Click to expand...

There was no possibility of being competitive in Danny's first two seasons. There wasn't.

What are you going to say if we win 22 games next year and get a good recruiting class?
 
RJKarl said:
There was no possibility of being competitive in Danny's first two seasons. There wasn't.

What are you going to say if we win 22 games next year and get a good recruiting class?
Click to expand...

I will still hate him with a passion probably.
 
I thought you saved your passion for the Christ...or at least Mel Gibson...
 
RJKarl said:
There was no possibility of being competitive in Danny's first two seasons. There wasn't.
Click to expand...
Why not? Buzz Williams went to the NIT in Year 2, and he inherited a less talented roster.
 
birdman said:
Not as hard to find as posts where I exhibit any level of hate towards Manning, despite repeated accusations.
Click to expand...

Actually, you just did 5 or 6 posts above. You assume we can all read your sarcasm and I am telling you that in that post, it's barely there. You are asking total strangers on the interweb to "get" your sarcasm, and then getting annoyed at posters (read: RJ) who aren't intuiting said sarcasm. I would suggest going one of three ways:

* killing the sarcasm
* using it as is and not worrying yourself over the overreactions and misreads - if 10% of posters thing you actually loathe/hate/would skull fuck Danny Manning, that is on them and you don't care
* altering your sarcasm meter up so that all but a few wack jobs get it.
 
Ayo said:
Why not? Buzz Williams went to the NIT in Year 2, and he inherited a less talented roster.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I feel like you must be related to Buzz Williams.

Or you are his agent.

I don’t ever disagree with your praise of him, but it’s like you can’t help yourself.

It’s like how I always want to talk about minutes even though nobody really cares but me.
 
jaybone said:
Actually, you just did 5 or 6 posts above. You assume we can all read your sarcasm and I am telling you that in that post, it's barely there. You are asking total strangers on the interweb to "get" your sarcasm, and then getting annoyed at posters (read: RJ) who aren't intuiting said sarcasm. I would suggest going one of three ways:

* killing the sarcasm
* using it as is and not worrying yourself over the overreactions and misreads - if 10% of posters thing you actually loathe/hate/would skull fuck Danny Manning, that is on them and you don't care
* altering your sarcasm meter up so that all but a few wack jobs get it.
Click to expand...

Please quote the post, any post, where I exhibited any hatred toward Manning other than the exasperated and, yes, sarcastic post (#727) on the thread above, after several posts wherein I tried to point out that coming to a different conclusion about Manning's coaching ability is rooted in differential inference, not hatred which RJ quite often asserts...to which RJ responded with asking how I would feel if Manning won 22 games next year. That is a pretty bullshit response, so I responded with some sarcastic bullshit too. Thanks for the advice though, sorry you were unable to pick up on the sarcasm...but It seems like maybe you did and are complaining about it nonetheless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top